WOMAN’S QUESTION ON CHASTITY

 

 

Had there been a simple answer to the much-debated subject of “chastity”, the world would serve as a comparatively better place.

The whole business of male superiority branded as women’s chastity is far more problematic than one could ever imagine. Why would a woman like Draupadi, so headstrong, confident, unafraid and witty, always be treated as a symbol of sympathy but never really looked up to? Although a lot of critics (both men and women) have spoken in her favour, do people really, after all these years, consider her as the “ideal” woman, the term that has religiously been associated with Goddess Sita? The reason lies in the very idea of “chastity”. It is rather disheartening to realize that the term is merely restricted to women. A man can go around having as many relationships as he wants and sexually indulge with no compunctions at all, but in a very similar instance, a woman is slut-shamed for being supposedly “promiscuous” and for her inability to prevent herself from being “violated”. This is what society expects us women to be like: forever conforming to its ideals, and if not, we are hardly given the respect that every human being rightfully deserves. A man’s sexual relationship is seen as a badge of pride and victory, and as the saying goes, “it is normal for a man”, but in the case of a woman, the whole question about her character comes in. This conservative or rather grotesque societal mindset of branding a woman’s character based on her so-called “chastity” is so degrading and inhumane a concept yet, unfortunately, stands as an unshaken social determinant. The “tearing” of a woman’s hymen, the elasticity of her vagina, the trimmed pubic hair and her involvement with males happen to define her character, as Madhu Menon observes. This reflects the fact that a woman is just a matter of objectification in the eyes of society.

What a pity it is that a woman’s consent is a subject of great controversy! She is just as powerless as an “attractive” rose in a garden- alive, yet plucked out for the sake of a momentary instance of pleasure for human beings. She tries defending herself in the case of rape or any form of physical or sexual assault just like the thorns of the rose do but eventually, however, is plucked out, irrespective of the consequence the violator might have to face. Similarly, a rapist too, despite knowing the consequences of their actions, will do it to experience that soul-destroying moment of pleasure. When a woman raises her voice against the rapist, to be punished, the courts which are mostly dominated by men, usually speak in the favour of the rapists. The fact that marital rape has still not been illegalized in India, no matter how progressive the judgements today are passed, reflects the intrinsic nature of apocalyptic patriarchy and societal conformity. It is ironic how in cases of a custody battle, a battle for divorce and so on a woman remains just as powerless as in the case of literal physical violation. Everything amounts to the backstory of a woman’s life as to whether she is a “socially respectable woman” in terms of her character. Sadly, she gets justice based on this.

A rapist gets punishment for the crime after decades when the gravity of the situation dies, and sadly, there still are some people who speak in the favour of those rapists. While there are woke people resisting the casual behaviour that many tend to have towards sexual violation, people in privileged and powerful positions seem to preserve the petty mindset. To cite an instance, I would like to remind my readers of an incident where a few ministers go about making light of a horrifying crime like rape by trivializing its cause and effect and justifying it through the idea of men being sexually active at their prime age. And so, for such people, they find no point in a woman’s resistance against rape as it ought to happen anyway. It is so ironic that people who are supposed to uphold the laws speak so barbarously and rationalize their gruesome notions with whatever suits them. If, even for a moment, we are to consider the gravity of the instance, why should the rapist, who is the violator, must get away with the social boycott (in many cases and to a great extent) but the woman, who is the victim, should be seen with eyes of contempt and indifference? A paradox lies in the idea that how some people would sympathize with these victims and also go on to speak in their favour but if it is connected to their families, suddenly, their perception changes! So, if a woman does not get a life partner, it is perfectly justified with her violation, in terms of chastity, as the reason and is readily struck off from the list of potential brides. To be a rapist is a sin but to be the victim is a greater sin, ironically. This is what society teaches us, paradoxically, and if someone revolts, they are looked at with raised eyebrows and rancour. If a man supports feminist discourses, he is considered effeminate, and here, the whole idea of heteronormative gender binaries is forced upon people, which is such a shame at our society’s end.

A woman’s desire/sexual pleasure is considered sinful but predominantly, the same might not be said in the case of men. Let us consider the instance of the widely practised Female-genital mutilation (FGM) procedures, an African tradition to preserve women’s chastity and forbid them from their sexual desires. This concept exposes society’s hypocrisy which claims to be “concerned” about them being violated, but at the same time, it does them out of their basic human rights. Ideologically, the bottom line is one of taking control over women. There is little to no importance given to a woman’s consent in such cases. Why is our society so obsessed with the idea of chastity? It is a matter of both concern and tension that people with such beliefs can go to any extent to preserve it even if it costs insurmountable pain or their lives too.

Here comes the whole idea of branding women as witches if they fail to conform to societal norms. It is ironic how India (with its so-called conservative mindset) does not stand alone in this matter. In fact, the extremely advanced England in the seventeenth century practised this, claiming the non-conforming women as witches. Why? Just because they voiced out their opinions? A woman is always supposed to be the “Madonna-like” figure. If she fails to do so, she is taken to be a mad, frigid woman, incapable of love or getting any form of acceptance and respect in society. If we have a look into contemporary times, false notions about witchcraft still continue (although lesser in number). However, a very phenomenal and refined form of misogyny has replaced it now- the whole idea of mocking women for having “feminist” views. The word “feminist” has been associated with the “Karen” prototype which is straight-up misogynistic. Women have always been suppressed; therefore, they are pretty skeptical while attempting in voicing out their truths and opinions. They are afraid that patriarchal men (and women too) might disapprove of their theories. The works of inspiring women writers like Adrienne Rich and Virginia Woolf expose such social and gender hypocrisies.  A man expressing his views is intellectual but a woman doing the same is out of a sense of craze, “unoriginality” or perhaps her mentally ill state?

Many “husband figures” seem to take control over their wives by imposing their authority of speech and free will. Sadly, this mindset has not only been nurtured by male patriarchs but also by the women who have given in to the ideals of these patriarchal structures. They see it as a resistance against their authority and capability if their wives should work. In a parallel situation, there are also men, who criticize their wives for not contributing financially, yet again pointing towards control and gender superiority. Physical violence is nevertheless carried out. It is so gigantic an irony because if a husband rapes, it is all hunky dory, in fact, it is not even considered “rape”, with marriage being a legal contract. Why, because the wife is mere property or an object to the husband? Now, where is the question of chastity? How can this society be relied upon in terms of  “idealism" if it professes such intense bias and opportunism? There is a need to discredit such a ruthless and despotic society.

These women’s issues are universal to all societies, classes, races, castes, countries and so on. Having a more nuanced look at women of disadvantaged castes, we realize that they are subject to double-way marginalization. While there are a lot of women speaking up with much pride, trying to fight these patriarchal and misogynistic setups, there are women who are still so marginalized that they can hardly be aware of their rights. It is our duty, irrespective of our genders, to enlighten them of their rights and capabilities and bring them to the front row. It is also our responsibility to let all those women, who have given in to patriarchal ideals, realize that it is high time all feminists should fight for a common cause of equality in all matters. As Michelle Obama rightly said, "Every woman's success should be an inspiration to another. We're strongest when we cheer each other on." To reach the zone of spiritual equality is still a far-fetched dream yet it is our present contributions which will furthermore aid our upcoming generations. One day, for sure, shall come when everyone will be seen as social equals in the eyes of society, supported by love and mutual respect.

 

Written by:

Sikta Tarangini,

Content Head,

Pink Legal Naaz.